Verification of Embedded Reactive Fiffo Systems

  • Frédéric Herbreteau
  • Franck Cassez
  • Alain Finkel
  • Olivier Roux
  • Grégoire Sutre
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2286)


Reactive Fiffo Systems (RFS) are used to model reactive systems which are able to memorize the events that cannot be processed when they occur. In this paper we investigate the decidability of verification problems for Embedded RFS which are RFS running under some environmental constraints. We show that almost all the usual verification problems are undecidable for the class of Periodically Embedded RFS with two memorizing events, whereas they become decidable for Regularly Embedded RFS with a single memorizing event. We then focus on Embedded Lossy RFS and we show in particular that for Regularly Embedded Lossy RFS the set of predecessors Pred. is upward closed and effectively computable.


Reactive Fiffo Systems Embedded Systems Verification Real-Time Systems Infinite-State Systems Decidability 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    P. Abdulla and B. Jonsson. Verifying programs with unreliable channels. In Proceedings, Eighth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 160–170. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    P. Abdulla and B. Jonsson. Undecidable veri.cation problems for programs with unreliable channels. In S. Abiteboul and E. Shamir, editors, Automata, Languages and Programming, 21st International Colloquium, volume 820 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 316–327, Jerusalem, Israel, 11–14 July 1994. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    P. A. Abdulla, K. Čerāns, B. Jonsson, and Y-K. Tsay. Algorithmic analysis of programs with well quasi-ordered domains. INFCTRL: Information and Computation (formerly Information and Control), 160, 2000.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    A. Bouajjani, J. Esparza, and O. Maler. Reachability analysis of pushdown automata: Application to model-checking. In Proc. 8th Int. Conf. Concurrency Theory (CONCUR’97), Warsaw, Poland, Jul. 1997, volume 1243 of Lecture Notes in omputer Science, pages 135–150. Springer, 1997.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    A. Bouajjani and R. Mayr. Model checking lossy vector addition systems. In Proc. 16th Ann. Symp. Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS’99), Trier, Germany, Mar. 1999, volume 1563 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 323–333. Springer, 1999.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    D. Brand and P. Zafiropulo. On communicating finite-state machines. Journal of the ACM, 30(2):323–342, April 1983.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    J. R. Burch, E. M. Clarke, K. L. McMillan, D. L. Dill, and J. Hwang. Symbolic model checking: 1020 states and beyond. Information and Computation, 98(2):142–170, 1992.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    F. Cassez and O. Roux. Compilation of the ELECTRE reactive language into finite transition systems. Theoretical Computer Science, 146(1–2):109–143, 24 July 1995.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    CCITT. Recommendation Z.100: Specification and Description Language SDL, blue book, volume x.1 edition, 1988.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    C. Dufourd, P. Jančar, and Ph. Schnoebelen. Boundedness of Reset P/T nets. In Proc. 26th Int. Coll. Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP’99), Prague, Czech Republic, July 1999, volume 1644 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 301–310. Springer, 1999.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    A. Finkel. A generalization of the procedure of Karp and Miller to well structured transition systems. In Thomas Ottmann, editor, Proceedings of the 14th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming, volume 267 of LNCS, pages 499–508, Karlsruhe, FRG, July 1987. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    A. Finkel. Reduction and covering of infinite reachability trees. Information and Computation, 89(2):144–179, December 1990.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    A. Finkel and P. McKenzie. Verifying identical communicating processes is undecidable. Theoretical Computer Science, 174(1–2):217–230, 15 March 1997.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    A. Finkel and Ph. Schnoebelen. Well structured transition systems everywhere! Theoretical Computer Science, 256(1–2):63–92, 2001.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    A. Finkel, B. Willems, and P. Wolper. A direct symbolic approach to model checking pushdown systems. In Proc. 2nd Int. Workshop on Verification of Infinite State Systems (INFINITY’97), Bologna, Italy, July 1997, volume 9 of Electronic Notes in Theor. Comp. Sci., pages 30–40. Elsevier Science, 1997.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    G. Higman. Ordering by divisibility in abstract algebras. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society (3), 2(7):326–336, September 1952.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    T. Jéron and C. Jard. Testing for unboundedness of fifo channels. Theoretical Computer Science, 113(1):93–117, 1993.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    O. Kushnarenko and Ph. Schnoebelen. A formal framework for the analysis of recursive-parallel programs. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1277:45–--, 1997.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    R. Mayr. Undecidable problems in unreliable computations. In International Symposium on Latin American Theoretical Informatics (LATIN’2000), volume 1776 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Punta del Este, Uruguay, 2000. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    M. L. Minsky. Computation: Finite and Infinite Machines. Prentice Hall, London, 1 edition, 1967.MATHGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    R. J. Parikh. On context-free languages. Journal of the ACM, 13(4):570–581, October 1966.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    G. Sutre, A. Finkel, O. Roux, and F. Cassez. Effective recognizability and model checking of reactive fiffo automata. In Proc. 7th Int. Conf. Algebraic Methodology and Software Technology (AMAST’98), Amazonia, Brazil, Jan. 1999, volume 1548 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 106–123. Springer, 1999.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frédéric Herbreteau
    • 1
    • 2
  • Franck Cassez
    • 1
  • Alain Finkel
    • 3
  • Olivier Roux
    • 1
  • Grégoire Sutre
    • 2
    • 4
  1. 1.IRCCyN (CNRS UMR 6597)Nantes cedex 3France
  2. 2.LaBRI (CNRS UMR 5800)Talence CedexFrance
  3. 3.LSV (CNRS UMR 8643)Cachan cedexFrance
  4. 4.ERL, 253 Cory HallUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations